ITS Calib: fix parallel processing for highly disordered data

[iravasen]

I noted that when I process data locally, with multiple processes, and tf are not well ordered from the file list in input, some operations in the calib workflow are not safe.

P2 not impacted.

Still this PR modifies quite many lines. A full revalidation has been carried out locally on all ITS calibration runs.

New feature: the percentage of successful extractions is not normalized to the total number of scanned rows. Before it was normalized to the total number of rows processed ("seen") by the wf which can be different in some cases.

More details:

• Before: to decide whether to process row data, the wf was checking whether the last N CDW were collected.
• Now: wf checks whether all CDW of that row has been collected before processing that row.

OTHER Features:

• option --local to be used with data replay when partial data are available (e.g. long runs for which a TF dump was only done partially).
• better handling of local data replay. The method finalize() is now also called in the endOfStream() that helps in case of partial data (e.g. digital scan) both locally and at P2.

[github-actions]

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION RELEASES:
To request your PR to be included in production software, please add the corresponding labels called "async-" to your PR. Add the labels directly (if you have the permissions) or add a comment of the form (note that labels are separated by a ",")

+async-label <label1>, <label2>, !<label3> ...

This will add <label1> and <label2> and removes <label3>.

The following labels are available
async-2023-pbpb-apass4
async-2023-pp-apass4
async-2024-pp-apass1
async-2022-pp-apass7
async-2024-pp-cpass0
async-2024-PbPb-apass1
async-2024-ppRef-apass1
async-2024-PbPb-apass2
async-2023-PbPb-apass5

[iravasen]

I need to perform another set of tests

[iravasen]

@fprino now this PR is ready.

[fprino]

We have one failing check. Could it be due to a glitch in the system?

[iravasen]

Yes I think so since before my last commit it was again failing. From the error message, it does not seem to be related to this PR itself.
Force merge or do I do a dummy commit to retrigger the test?

[iravasen]

I did a dummy commit since I will travel in the next hours. Can I kindly ask you to force merge if the test will fail again? Thank you very much.